2020 (4) TMI 129 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal affirms disallowance of excess depreciation on goodwill due to valuation discrepancies

Abhishri Packaging Pvt. Ltd. Versus DCIT-9 (1) (1) Mumbai

The Tribunal upheld the decision of the AO and CIT(A) to disallow excess depreciation claimed on Goodwill due to discrepancies in net worth valuation for ... Depreciation on Goodwill - inflated value of goodwill - assessee followed AS-14 for accounting of acquisition of business, while arriving at goodwill - method of valuation or computation of net-worth for different purposes - CIT (Appeals) restricting Depreciation considering the Goodwill as the net worth of the Seller instead of Assets as per valuation report as reduced by the Liabilities - Goodwill booked by the Assessee is the Net difference in Consideration paid on purchase of the Unit under Slump Sale, as reduced by the individual Assets other than Assets except Goodwill accounted for as per valuation Report - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, AS-14, nowhere prescribed for different method of computation of net worth of undertaking acquired by way of slump sale for different purposes. In this case, the assessee although, followed AS-14 for accounting of acquisition of business, while arriving at goodwill, it has revalued its assets, which is different from value of assets, as per books of accounts of erstwhile proprietorship firm. When it comes to payment of capital gain on slump sale, the proprietor of erstwhile firm has taken net worth as per books of accounts of firm as on the date of acquisition. From the above, it is very clear that the assessee has taken different values for the purpose of accounting of acquisition of business and the proprietor has followed different method for computation of net-worth for the purpose of computation of capital gain on slump sale. Since, the seller of assets i.e proprietor of erstwhile firm and the director of the present assessee are one and the same and also, fact that the director has holding more than 21% in present company, it is undoubtedly clear that the assessee has followed a different method for accounting goodwill in books of accounts, so as to claim higher depreciation, although such method has been followed in accordance with prescribed accounting standard. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the Ld. AO, as well as the Ld.CIT(A) were right in, coming to the conclusion that the assessee has arrived at inflated value of goodwill to claim higher depreciation on intangibles. Since, the assessee has taken different values for different purposes, we are of the considered view that the ratio laid down CHOWGULE & COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX [2016 (2) TMI 407 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] is not applicable to the case of the assessee and hence, the same is hereby rejected. - Decided against assessee. Issues:1. Depreciation on Goodwill calculation method and value.2. Disallowance of excess depreciation claimed on Goodwill.3. Discrepancy in net worth valuation for different purposes.Issue 1: Depreciation on Goodwill calculation method and valueThe assessee claimed depreciation on Goodwill based on the difference between the consideration paid for acquisition of business and the net worth of the undertaking acquired. The AO disallowed excess depreciation, stating that the net worth was artificially inflated. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, limiting the depreciation to the actual goodwill amount. The AR argued that the valuation method followed AS-14 and was supported by a registered valuer's report. The AR contended that assets were revalued, justifying the higher goodwill value. However, the authorities found discrepancies in net worth computation for different purposes, leading to an inflated goodwill value for higher depreciation. The Tribunal agreed with the AO and CIT(A), dismissing the appeal.Issue 2: Disallowance of excess depreciation claimed on GoodwillThe AO disallowed excess depreciation claimed on Goodwill by re-computing the goodwill amount, alleging an artificial inflation of goodwill value for higher depreciation. The CIT(A) upheld this disallowance, emphasizing that the depreciation should be based on the actual goodwill value. The AR argued that the valuation method was in line with AS-14 and supported by a registered valuer's report. However, the authorities found discrepancies in net worth valuation for different purposes, leading to an inflated goodwill value. The Tribunal concurred with the AO and CIT(A), dismissing the appeal.Issue 3: Discrepancy in net worth valuation for different purposesThe AO and CIT(A) noted that the assessee adopted different net worth values for different purposes, inflating the goodwill value for higher depreciation claims. The AR argued that the valuation method followed AS-14 and was supported by a registered valuer's report. However, discrepancies in net worth computation for accounting and capital gain purposes were observed. The Tribunal concluded that the assessee inflated the goodwill value to claim higher depreciation, leading to the disallowance of excess depreciation. The appeal was dismissed, upholding the authorities' findings.This detailed analysis covers the issues of depreciation on Goodwill calculation method and value, disallowance of excess depreciation claimed on Goodwill, and the discrepancy in net worth valuation for different purposes as addressed in the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai's judgment.